f  %r  A 


m. 


J.H.   Elliott 


s-fc 


i  ¥mi 


The  Plenary  Inspiration 
of  the 
Holy  Scriptures 


i'  A 


BS480 
£465 


l.r*'^ 


H  ^ 


-E4foG 


ALUMNI     PUBLICATION  : 
THE  THEOLOGICAL   SEMINARY  OF  VIRGINIA, 


THE    PLENARY    INSPIRATION 


OF   THE    HOLY   SCRIPTURES. 


A     PAPER 


READ  BEFORE  THE  SOCIETY  OF  THE  ALUMNI,  JUNE  24,  1885, 


/ 
Rev.  John  H.  Elliott,  S.  T.  D. 

Rector  of  the  Church  of  the  Ascension, 
WASHINGTON,   D.  C. 


■WASHIKGTON,   D.  C.  : 

Press  op  Thomas  McGill  &  Co. 

lo8  J. 


PAPER 


The  Convocation  of  Canterbury  at  its  recent  meeting 
thanked  "  the  revisers  of  the  authorized  version  of  the 
Old  Testament  for  the  unwearied  labor  and  singular  dili- 
gence which  they  have  expended  during  many  years  in 
completing  the  weighty  task  entrusted  to  them,"  Their 
unwearied  labor  and  singular  diligence  were  emphasized 
by  the  statement  of  Archdeacon  Harrison,  that  the  "  re- 
vision, as  completed  in  eighty-five  sessions,  occupied  seven 
hundred  and  ninety-two  daj's,  and  that  on  each  of  these 
days  the  company  generally  sat  for  six  hours."  At  the 
same  meeting  of  Convocation  the  Bishop  of  Winchester 
declared  that  "  great  thanks  were  due  to  the  Americans 
for  their  assistance,"  and  we  are  reminded  as  we  gather  on 
this  hill  that  to  the  learned  revisers  in  the  Old  World  there 
were  added  learned  revisers  from  the  New,  and  that^  in  our 
own  modern  Bible-house,  the  same  "  unwearied  labor  and 
singular  diligence  "  were  expended  which  won  the  thanks 
of  Convocation  for  the  toilers  in  the  venerable  Jerusalem 
chamber.  We  know,  too,  that  to  the  toil  of  the  two  years 
devoted  to  the  sessions  there  must  be  added  the  toil  in  the 
closet  and  the  cloister  during  the  remainder  of  the  four- 
teen years  devoted  to  ascertaining  the  "  pure  and  native 
significance  of  the  Word."  And  then  to  the  labor  on  the 
Old  there  must  be  added  the  labor  on  the  New  Testament. 

I  am  to  speak  to  you  to-day  of  the  Plenary  Inspiration 
of  the  Bible;  and  I  cannot  but  regard  these  colossal  labors, 
and  the  intense  interest  felt  in  them  by  the  people  who 
speak  the  language  of  the  revision,  as  testifying,  however 
unconsciously,  to  the  prevalence  of  a  very  high  doctrine 
of  inspiration.  Is  it  not  true  that  this  work  of  fourteen 
years  was  entered  on  without  any  expectation  that  it  would 


affect  the  substance  of  the  Bible — its  moral  or  spiritual 
teaching?  Is  it  not  true  that  upon  every  word  of  the 
original  about  which  there  is  question  there  have  been  ex- 
pended "  unwearied  labor  and  singular  diligence,"  whether 
that  word  speaks  of  doctrines  or  history  of  some  buried 
town  or  some  forgotten  link  in  a  remote  genealogy  ?  Then 
what  labor  and  diligence  to  give  "  the  pure  and  native  sig- 
nificance of  the  word."  No  definite  argument  from  these 
premises  is  intended,  but  an  advocate  for  the  plenary  inspir- 
ation of  Scripture,  amid  prevalent  and  popular  theories  of 
partial  inspiration,  may  welcome  the  moral  support  which 
seems  to  be  given  by  this  unconscious  testimony  of  Eng- 
lish-speaking Christians. 

It  is  not  meant  by  plenary  inspiration  that  the  whole 
Bible  was  communicated  by  revelation  to  the  writers.  Part 
was  revealed ;  the  whole  was  inspired.  If  it  be  necessary 
to  venture  on  a  definition  of  inspiration,  may  not  this  suffice: 
Holy  men  of  God  spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy 
Ghost  of  things  discovered  by  them  and  of  things  re- 
vealed to  them ;  and  they  spake  nothing  more,  nothing 
less,  and  nothing  else  than  what  the  Holy  Ghost  moved 
them  to  speak?  The  first  clause  defines  inspiration ;  the 
second  clause,  plenary  inspiration.  The  result  of  plenary 
inspiration  is  that  the  Bible  is  throughout  the  word  of  men 
(for  men  spake),  and  yet  throughout  the  word  of  God. 

This,  to-day,  is  a  conference  luiihin  the  household  of  faith  ; 
not  a  contest  with  the  world  for  the  faith.  It  is  a  colloquy 
among  brethren,  agreed  upon  the  great  fundamentals  of 
the  faith.  This  argument  need  not  traverse  these  funda- 
mentals; they  may  be  taken  for  granted.  The  ISicene 
creed  will  be  selected  as  the  common  ground  on  which  we 
stand.  One  reason  for  the  selection  is  obvious :  It  con- 
tains the  clause  "  who  spake  by  the  prophets."  Confine  the 
word  "  prophets"  to  its  narrow  meaning, and  we  all  believe, 
at  the  least,  that  the  Holy  Ghost  spake  by  the  prophets. 
The  second  reason  for  the  selection,  as  will  appear  in  the 


sequel,  is  its  articulate  statement  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
Divine-human  person  of  our  Blessed  Lord. 

It  is  very  important  to  determine  the  proper  method  to 
be  pursued  in  this  argument,  and  in  doing  so  to  remember 
that  inspiration  belongs  to  the  realm  of  the  supernatural. 
That  it  does  belong  to  the  realm  of  the  supernatural,  will 
be  conceded  by  the  advocates  of  partial  and  of  plenary  in- 
spiration alike.  The  tirst  evidence  for  which  we  ask  in 
attestation  of  a  supernatural  fact  is  testimony;  and  having 
first  listened  to  testimony,  we  turn  next  to  the  internal  evi- 
dence, and  ask  whether  the  phenomena  harmonize  with  the 
declarations  of  the  witnesses.  But  the  vicious  method  often 
pursued  in  this  argument  is  to  begin  with  the  phenomena, 
construct  a  theory  which  gives  illusive  promise  of  harmony 
with  them,  and  then  give  the  witnesses  a  tardy  and  imper- 
fect hearing.  In  the  second  place,  since  inspiration  be- 
longs to  the  realm  of  the  supernatural,  we  cannot  expect 
to  give  a  logical  solution  of  all  its  phenomena,  to  show  their 
logical  coherence.  "All  abstract  analysis  of  inspiration  is 
impossible,"  says  Canon  Westcott ;  "  the  nature  of  its  op- 
eration transcends  the  power  of  our  thought."  And  in  the 
third  place,  we  must  not  expect  to  find  any  adequate  illus- 
tration of  inspiration  in  the  natural  world.  We  must  not 
forget  that  a  miracle  is,  "  on  one  side  of  it,  not  a  fact  of 
this  world,  but  of  the  invisible  world,theDivine  interposition 
in  it  being  a  supernatural  and  mysterious  act."  Imperfect 
and  misleading  are  the  comparisons  of  the  inspired  writer 
to  the  pen  or  penman,  lute  or  lyre,  messenger  or  ambassador. 
We  must  compare  things  supernatural  with  supernatural; 
and  searching  the  realm  of  the  supernatural  for  an  illustra- 
tion of  the  Divine-human  Book,  our  eyes  may  rest  ador- 
ingly on  the  Divine-human  Person  to  whom  the  Book  does 
homage.  "  There  is  a  growing  disposition  "  says  a  Bamp- 
ton  lecturer,  "  to  accept  the  union  of  the  Divine  and 
human  natures  in  the  person  of  Christ  as  the  model  for 
our  belief  upon  His  written  Word."     I  shall  endeavor  to 


show  in  the  sequel  that  this  growing  disposition  is  abund- 
antly justiHed.  I  now  only  suggest  the  illustration  that 
it  may  win  from  you  a  patient  hearing  and  perhaps  an  ac- 
ceptance of  my  argument  for  the  Divine-human  character 
of  the  Bible.  Why  should  we  not  accept  the  Book  as 
truly  Divine  and  perfectly  human,  when  we  have  already 
bowed  adoringly  before  the  same  supernatural  union  in  the 
God-man  ?  What  demand  on  a  rational  faith  is  made  by 
the  iirst  which  has  not  been  granted  in  the  second?  What 
analysis  can  solve  the  mysteries  of  either  union?  And  if 
the  first  step  in  the  argument  for  the  mystery  of  the  Incar- 
nation is  the  testimony  of  that  Word,  written,  "  that  we 
might  believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Sou  of  God,"  then  the 
testimony  of  the  Living  Church,  interpreting  that  Word, — 
should  we  not,  as  we  stand  before  the  mystic  Book,  with- 
hold our  guesses,  our  individual  theories,  and  listen  rev- 
erently to  the  testimony  given  by  the  Book  itself — given 
by  the  Church  of  God  interpreting  the  Book? 

I.  If  we  turn  first  to  the  human  element,  it  surely  is  not 
necessary  to-day  to  argue  for  its  existence.  The  tendency 
in  a  past  age  was  to  assert  the  Divine  element  to  the  dis- 
paragement of  the  human.  The  tendency  to-day  is  to 
assert  the  human  element  and  retire  the  Divine  element 
from  portions,  large  or  small,  of  the  sacred  volume.  It  is 
superfluous  to  expend  argument  upon  that  which  on  every 
side  is  admitted  and  asserted  ;  but  the  space  which  might 
have  been  given  to  argument  must  be  devoted  to  a  caution 
against  an  erroneous  inference  frequently  drawn  from  the 
admission  of  a  human  element  in  the  Bible.  "  If  human, 
therefore  fallible ;"  that  is  the  erroneous  inference ;  that 
is  the  unwarranted  assumption ;  that  the  postulate  which 
underlies  and  vitiates  whole  essays  and  volumes  on  this 
theme.  If  human,  then  you  must  expect  mistakes — down- 
right errors — such  as  mar  human  compositions.  Is  this 
not  to  beg  the  very  question  at  issue  ?     Whether  the  men 


who  spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost  were 
not,  though  men,  guarded  from  error  by  the  All-seeing 
Spirit;  whether  the  Scripture,  given  by  inspiration  of  God, 
is  not  distinguished  by  infallibility,  though  given  through 
men,  from  other  scriptures  of  men — is  not  that  the  ques- 
tion ?  The  Great  Being  whose  "  nature  and  whose  name 
is  Love,"  that  He  might  reveal  Himself  to  men,  took  on 
Him  the  winning  form  of  our  own  brotherhood;  and  the 
Man  spake  without  error,  as  He  lived  without  sin.  Our 
loving  Father  would  make  known  His  will  to  men  and 
record  his  dealings  in  the  past  for  the  admonition  of  the 
present  and  the  future.  He  speaks  through  men,  employs 
all  the  cadences  of  human  speech,  that  He  might  win  all 
human  hearts.  Is  not  this  the  question — whether  He  did 
not  preserve  the  glorious  company  of  the  apostles,  the 
goodly  fellowship  of  the  prophets,  while  writing,  from 
error  ?  Is  it  not  to  beg  the  very  question  at  issue  to 
assume  "if  human,  then  fallible;"  that  if  you  hear  the 
accents  of  human  speech,  you  must  expect  the  mistakes  of 
human  fallibility  ? 

The  disproof  of  this  inference  from  the  human  ele- 
ment will  come  naturally  and  incidentally  in  the  proof 
of  the  Divine  element  in  the  Bible.  Now,  only  let 
the  caution  be  given  against  assuming  that  the  admis- 
sion of  the  human  element  is  the  admission  of  error.  For 
example :  A  human  feature  of  the  Book  is  its  progress- 
ive teaching.  There  is  a  growth  more  or  less  contin- 
uous from  Genesis  to  Revelation.  To  the  earlier  ages 
the  language  of  revelation  is  the  simple  language  of  St. 
Paul :  "  I  have  fed  you  with  milk,  not  with  meat,  for 
hitherto  ye  were  not  able  to  bear  it."  Now,  is  this  imma- 
turity an  imperfection?  Are  the  earlier  revelations  fal- 
lible because,  though  crescent,  they  shine  not  yet  with  full- 
orbed  light?  So  it  has  been  urged.  So  God's  gracious 
adaptation  of  His  instruction  to  the  childhood  of  His  people 
and  the  conditions  of  our  humanity  has  been  perverted. 


8 

But  surely  youth  is  perfect  as  youth,  though  its  perfection 
is  not  the  perfection  of  manhood.  Surely  an  incomplete 
revelation  is  not  misleading  and  fallible  when  it  speaks  all 
that  its  hearers  can  bear,  and  when  it  testifies  all  along  to 
its  own  incompleteness  by  some  such  words  as  these:  ^'I 
have  many  things  to  say  to  you,  but  ye  cannot  bear  them 
now."  Besides,  we  are  told  of  the  God-man,  He  "  ad- 
vanced in  wisdom."  The  advance  is  a  human  feature. 
Did  it  imply  any  fallibility  in  Him  ?  Why,  then,  should 
advance  in  wisdom  imply  any  fallibility  in  the  Divine- 
human  Book  ?  And  so  we  may  say  in  its  "  advance  in 
wisdom,"  the  Book  is  human,  yet  not  fallible. 

Again,  a  human  feature  of  the  Book  is  that  in  testifying 
to  facts,  natural  or  supernatural,  it  aids  our  faith  by  observ- 
ing the  usual  character  of  human  testimony.  "  The  usual 
character  of  human  testimony,"  says  Paley,  "  is  substantial 
truth  under  circumstantial  variety.  This  is  what  the  daily 
experience  of  courts  of  justice  teaches."  Now,  it  would 
seem  that  it  is  necessary  that  the  Word  of  God  should  have 
this  usual  character  of  human  testimony  so  as  to  vvin  human 
faith.  Circumstantial  identity  in  the  four  gospels,  for  in- 
stance, would  be  regarded  as  sure  proof  of  collusion  and  con- 
spiracy. You  remember  that  Henry  Rogers,  in  the  "  Eclipse' 
of  Faith,"  introduces  a  speculator  attempting  to  establish 
a  revelation  on  the  basis  of  miracles.  "  He  recorded  the 
results  by  ten  witnesses,  and  with  such  perfection  of  art 
that  all  the  ingenuity  of  all  the  critics  of  succeeding  ages 
could  not  detect  a  single  variation  other  than  iu  language. 
The  records  themselves  and  their  contents  were  precisely 
the  same.  And  what  was  the  result  ?  Why  this  identity 
of  substance,  and  almost  of  manner,  showed  most  evidently, 
said  the  critics,  that  there  had  been  collusion  between  the 
several  parties  who  had  framed  the  revelation,  and  in  the 
course  of  three  or  four  generations  it  was  universally  re- 
jected as  totally  unworthy  of  belief."  And  yet  it  is  often 
alleged  that  this  circumstantial  variety  is  variation  from 


the  truth,  and  marks  the  fallibility  of  the  writer.  The 
allegation  seems  to  confound  variety  with  contrariety. 
Paley  says,  not  "substantia!  truth  with  circumstantial" 
contrariety,  but  "variety" — the  varied  stories  of  inde- 
pendent witnesses,  each  free  from  error,  though  from  his 
standpoint  giving  but  part  of  the  truth.  Now,  it  is  freely 
granted  that  this  human  element  of  circumstantial  variety 
is  conspicuous  in  the  Bible ;  but  it  by  no  means  follows 
that  the  Bible,  because  in  this  respect  human,  is  therefore 
fallible.* 

The  human  element  of  the  Bible !  Let  this  caution  be 
remembered,  and  then  we  may  assert  that  the  Book,  which 
comes  from  the  God  of  all  the  families  of  the  earth,  is 
intensely  human — the  most  human  of  all  books.  From 
its  pages  we  hear  the  laughter  and  the  fretful  cry  of  chil- 
dren ;  Ishmael  mocking  Isaac,  and  Isaac's  mother  avenging 
him  on  Ishmael  and  his  mother;  the  young  man  rejoicing 
in  his  strength  and  the  maiden  in  her  bloom.  There  are 
wooings  and  weddings,  feasts  and  funerals.  There  old  age 
counts  the  "  days  of  its  years  "  as  it  goes  down  in  sorrow 
to  the  grave,  or  wears  with  regal  look  the  hoary  "  crowa 
of  glory."  Now  you  pitch  your  tents  with  the  patriarchs, 
amid  the  bleating  of  flocks  and  herds  and  the  fragrance 
of  fresh  meadows ;  and  the  herdsman  or  the  huntsman 
comes  home  hungry  from  the  field  or  the  chase ;  and  now, 
amid  the  splendors  of  a  colossal  empire,  you  gaze  upon  the 

*  Objection  is  made  to  plenary  inspiration  on  account  of  the  variety 
in  tlie  accounts  given  of  the  superscription  on  the  Cross.  The  objec- 
tion supposes  that  plenary  inspiration  requires  the  report  of  the  identi- 
cal words  used  on  any  given  occasion,  whereas  what  plenary  inspi- 
ration does  mean  is  that  the  writer  in  reporting  the  occasion  is 
inspired  to  use  the  identical  words  which  he  does  use.  In  reporting 
the  superscription,  the  four  inspired  Evangelists  give  "substantial 
truth  under  circumstantial  variety."  The  substance  is  "King  of  the 
Jews,"  and  that  is  reported  by  each  Evangelist.  Paley's  rule  applies 
to  the  report  of  words,  whether  written  or  spoken^  and  it  is  strange 
that  the  objectors  do  not  see  this. 


10 

palace  where  a  Pharoah  rules  in  pride,  or  a  Belshazzar 
feasts  in  pomp  with  a  thousand  lords,  or  a  Nero  frowns  in 
world-wide  power.  There  is  the  Prime  Minister  of  the 
great  empire,  and  the  subtle  diplomatist  and  captains  and 
judges.  There  the  merchant  is  seen  toiling  with  his  car- 
avan across  the  desert,  or  in  Tyre,  "  prince  of  traffick- 
ers," welcoming  home  ships  from  every  port,  and  the  pro- 
ducts of  every  clime.  Now  armies  march,  and  a  Deborah 
rejoices  in  the  spoil  and  victory;  or  a  father  cries,  "  O  my 
son,  my  son,  would  God  I  had  died  for  thee !  "  There  the 
fisherman  casts  his  net  and  the  husbandman  guides  his 
plow;  and  there  are  bankers  and  lawyers,  and  physicians 
and  prophets,  and  priests  and  preachers.  There  is  every 
one  of  the  many  types  of  woman  in  home  or  history,  from 
a^  Jezebel  or  Herodias  to  a  Mary  sitting  at  Jesus'  feet.  If 
you  wander  in  the  wilderness,  if  you  go  down  to  the  sea 
in  ships,  you  find  fellow-wanderers  and  fellow-voyagers  in 
the  Bible.  Wherever  your  home — in  country,  hamlet, 
town,  or  city — you  will  find  your  home  in  the  Bible.  Is 
your  home  amid  torrid  suns  ?  it  tells  you  of  the  shad- 
dow  of  a  great  rock  in  a  weary  land.  Is  your  home  nestled 
beneath  the  mountain  heights,  clad  in  perpetual  snow  and 
vocal  with  torrents  all  night  and  all  day  long  ?  you  have  in 
the  Bible  the  snow  of  Lebanon  and  the  "cold,  flowing 
waters," 

"  The  torrent  brooks  of  hallowed  Israel 
From  craggy  hollows  pouring  late  and  soon." 

II.  So  true  is  it  that  the  Bible  is  written  for  man,  to  man, 
through  man;  that  the  Bible  is  the  word  of  man.  Not  the 
less  true  is  it  that  the  Bible  is  the  Word  of  God.  More  is 
here  affirmed  than  that  the  Bible  "  contains  the  word  of 
God."  The  homilies  which,  to  guard  us  against  tradition, 
teach  that  the  Bible,  not  tradition,  contains  the  Word  of 
God,  affirm  elsewhere  the  doctrine  here  affirmed — that 
"  the  Scripture  is  the  Word  of  the  Living  God  ;  "  "  the  Holy 
Spirit  is  the  author  of  the  Books  of  Holy  Scriptures." 


11 

1.  On  this  subject  we  may  first  listen  reverently  to  the  tes- 
timony of  our  Blessed  Lord  Himself.  There  stood  before 
Him  the  Old  Testament  as  there  stand  before  us  to-day 
the  Old  Testament  and  the  ISTew.  We  know  that  the 
Scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament  which  He  held  in  His 
sacred  hands  were  in  every  essential  respect  the  very  same 
we  read  to-day.  We  know  that  the  Jewish  Church  and 
the  Jewish  people  generally  regarded  them  as  the  word  of 
God  in  every  jot  and  tittle.  We  know  that  this  doctrine, 
though  implied  in  many  a  discussion,  was  never  in  the 
least  discountenanced  by  the  Lord  Jesus.  We  know  that 
He  rebuked  the  Pharisees  for  teaching  for  doctrine  the 
commandments  of  men,  the  traditions  of  the  elders,  and 
that  He  enthroned  the  Scriptures  as  the  supreme  and  sole 
rule  of  doctrine ;  and  we  know  that,  besides.  He  gave  the 
following  testimony: 

First,  hear  Him  teach  that  the  Old  Testament,  in  one 
passage  at  least,  is  both  the  word  of  man  and  the  Word 
of  God.  Li  St.  Mark,  7, 10,  these  are  his  words :  "  Moses 
said,  honor  thy  father  and  thy  mother;  and  whoso  curseth 
father  or  mother,  let  him  die  the  death."  In  St.  Matthew, 
15,  4,  the  same  words  are  ascribed  to  God :  ''  God  com- 
manded, saying,  honor  thy  father  and  mother;  and  he 
that  curseth  father  or  mother,  let  him  die  the  death."  In 
the  first  quotation  he  says  Moses  said ;  in  the  second,  God 
commanded,  saying.  Does  He  not  teach  that  the  same 
passage  is  the  word  of  man  and  the  Word  of  God  ?  Nay, 
more  than  this — does  He  not,  perhaps,  teach  that  it  was  not 
only  man,  but  the  man  Moses  in  particular,  who  spoke — 
Moses  in  all  his  individuality,  "  his  personality  not  destroyed 
by  the  action  of  the  Divine  Power?"  for  there  is  the  "Di- 
vine Power ;  "  it  is  God's  work,  too — "  God  commanded 
saying." 

In  the  second  place,  nine  times  does  our  Blessed  Lord  use 
the  term  "  Scripture  "  in  speaking  to  the  Jews.  He  knew 
what  they  would  understand  by  "  Scripture."   They  would 


12 

understand  that  collection  of  writings  which  they  regarded 
as  the  "  oracles  of  God" — as  the  Word  of  God.  He  must 
have  fortified  their  opinions  by  what  He  said  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. They  foretell,  and  they  "must  be  fulfilled;  "  they 
speak,  and  their  decision  is  final.  On  one  occasion  He 
first  identified  the  Scripture  with  the  Word  of  God,  and 
then  adds:  "The  Scripture  cannot  be  broken." 

In  the  third  place,  Our  Blessed  Lord  distinctly  calls  the 
Old  Testament  the  "  Word  of  God."  He  calls  it  the 
Word  of  God  on  one  occasion  when  quoting  from  "  the 
Law."  He  calls  it  the  Word  of  God  on  another  occasion 
when  quoting  from  "the  Psalms" — another  of  the  three 
great  divisions  of  the  Old  Testament.  He  would  of  course 
be  understood  by  those  to  whom  He  spoke  as  including  the 
entire  Old  Testament  as  the  Word  of  God.  By  that  au- 
gust name,  grown  so  familiar  to  us,  lawgiver  and  psalmist 
and  prophet  had,  under  divine  instruction,  hallowed  in  the 
thoughts  of  the  people  to  whom  God  gave  his  oracles 
the  slowly-growing  volume  of  the  elder  Revelation.  How 
frequent  and  how  impressive  the  uncounted  repetition  of  the 
name !  Hear  the  psalmist  say :  "  Thy  Word  is  a  lamp  unto 
my  feet."  "I  trust  in  'thy  Word.'"  "I  hope  in  Thy 
Word."  "  Thy  Word  is  true  from  the  beginning."  And  now 
He  is  come  to  whom  that  Word  pointed.  He  speaks.  He, 
theTruth;  andHecallstheOldTestament  the  Word  of  God. 
Mark  the  expression — the  Word  of  God.  It  would  seem 
that  the  force  of  the  argument  from  this  august  name  of  the 
Sacred  Volume  has  been  overlooked.  Must  we  not  accept 
the  expression  in  its  natural  sense  until  that  sense  be  dis- 
proved ?  And  must  we  not  accept  that  sense  which  the 
Infallible  Teacher  intended  as  infallibly  true?  Could  He 
be  misled,  and  would  He  mislead  others  ?  If  that  elder 
volume  were  not  the  Word  of  God,  would  The  Truth  have 
sanctioned  a  misleading  name  ? 

Take  the  theory,  for  instance,  which  teaches  that  the 
Holy  Ghost  is  not  responsible  for  the  words  of  Scripture, 


13 

but  only  for  "  the  moral  truths,  the  final  purpose,  the 
spiritual  teaching" — a  theory  which,  dealing  with  the 
supernatural,  and  needing  the  support  of  testimony,  cannot 
adduce  one  testimony  from  the  Scriptures  in  its  behalf. 
Suppose,  for  a  moment,  that  that  theory  is  correct ;  would 
it  then  be  accurate,  truthful,  to  call  the  Scriptures  "the 
Word  of  God  ? "  On  that  theory  the  words  are  not  only  men's 
words — that,  plenary  inspiration  grants,  but  men's  words 
only — that,  plenary  inspiration  denies.  Would  it  be  accu- 
rate, sincere,  to  speak  of  the  volume  as  the  Word  of  God  ? 
With  that  theory  it  would  seem  that  the  unerring  hps 
might  have  spoken  of  the  doctrine  of  God,  the  truth  of  God, 
but  not  the  Word  of  God. 

Brethren,  we  are  wont  to  accord  to  the  writer  of  the 
mere  human  volume  the  respect  of  believing  that  he  means 
what  he  says  and  that  he  says  what  he  means.  To  the 
phrase,  oft  and  deliberately  repeated,  without  one  circum- 
stance to  caution  us  against  its  natural  meaning,  with  many 
a  circumstance  to  contirm  that  meaning,  that  meaning  we 
feel  bound  to  give.  And  when  I  find  in  the  sacred  vol- 
ume the  august  name  "Word  of  the  Lord,"  "Word  of 
God,"  oft  and  deliberately  repeated — repeated  not  only  by 
David  and  all  the  prophets,  but  by  David's  Lord,  without 
one  caution  that  it  does  not  mean  what  is  said,  with  many 
a  circumstance  confirming  the  meaning — I  must  accept  the 
Old  Testament  as  the  Word  of  God. 

We  have  still  further  testimony  from  Incarnate  Deity, 
from  what  He  said  and  what  He  did.  He  builds  doctrines 
upon  single  words  of  the  Old  Testament  as  on  an  infallible 
foundation,  and  adds  words  which  add  significance  to  the 
act.  Closing  his  public  ministry  with  the  affirmation  of 
His  two- fold  nature,  thus  He  proves  His  Deity:  "David 
called  Him  Lord ;"  and  adds,  "  David  said  by  [or  in]  the 
Holy  Ghost.''''  Again,  He  argues  from  a  single  word  in  a 
Psalm,  and  adds,  "  the  Scripture  cannot  be  broken."  He 
treats  historic  details  and  incidents  of  individual  life  just  as 


14 

reverently  as  general  truths  and  precepts,  holding  up  the 
flood  and  the  fire  storm  as  Divine  judgments  for  the  past 
and  warnings  for  the  future;  holding  up  the  burial  of  the 
prophet  Jonah  beneath  the  surface  of  the  great  deep  as  a 
sign  of  His  own  burial  beneath  the  surface  of  the  earth. 
"  He  never  in  any  single  instance  taught  or  said  the  least 
thing  which  implied  that  there  was  any  book  or  any  text 
contained  in  the  Old  Testament  which  was  not  the  Word 
of  God,  and  which  had  not  Divine  authority.  He  never 
said  anything  which  implied  that  one  part  was  the  Word 
of  God,  in  a  lower  sense,  or  that  it  had  less  authority  than 
other  parts." 

He  who  accepts  the  plenary  inspiration  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment will  hardly  need  argument  to  convince  him  of  the 
plenary  inspiration  of  the  New ;  and  we  cannot,  of  course, 
expect  the  same  sort  of  testimony  from  the  living  and  true 
Witness  to  the  New  Testament — the  Book  of  the  future — as 
He  gave  to  the  Book  of  the  past.  But  He  gave  significant 
promises  to  His  apostles ;  and  promise  from  Him  is  as  sure 
as  testimony.  He  sends  them  forth  to  teach  all  the  nations. 
He  promises  that  the  Holy  Spirit  shall  teach  them,  the 
teachers,  and  bring  all  things  to  their  remembrance.  He 
promises  them,  on  some  occasions  at  least,  the  plenary  in- 
spiration of  the  Holy  Ghost.  "  Go  ye,  therefore,"  He 
said  to  the  Apostles,  "teaching  them" —  all  the  nations — 
"  to  observe  whatsoever  I  have  commanded."  And  teach- 
ing includes  the  written  as  well  as  the  spoken  word — the 
epistle  of  St.  Peter  as  well  as  the  sermon  of  St.  Peter. 
*'  Ye  were  taught,  whether  by  ivord  or  by  epistle  of  ours," 
said  the  Apostle  to  the  Thessalonians.  Why  should  not 
this  commission  enfold  the  command  to  loriie  as  well  as  the 
command  to  preach  it;  to  add  the  Scripture  of  the  Apostles 
to  the  Scripture  of  the  Prophets  ?  To  these  teachers  He 
makes  the  promise  that  they  shall  be  taught  by  the  Holy 
Ghost — taught  what  they  had  not  yet  known  and  reminded 
of  what  they  had  known.     "  He  shall  teach  you  all  things," 


15 

and  "He  shall  bring  to  your  remembrance  all  that  I  said 
unto  you."  He  would  thus  reveal  new  truth,  and  bring  to 
the  accurate  remembrance  of  St.  John,  for  instance,  the 
long  discourse  at  Capernaum  or  that  in  the  upper  chamber. 
Then,  by  a  threefold  promise,  He  assures  them  of  plenary 
inspiration  on  at  least  certain  occasions  of  their  ministry. 
"  When  they  deliver  you  up,  be  not  anxious  how  or  what 
ye  shall  speak ;  for  it  shall  be  given  you  in  that  hour  what 
ye  shall  speak;  for  it  is  not  ye  that  speak,  but  the  Spirit  of 
your  Father  that  speaketh  in  you."  I  think  we  may  under- 
stand these  latter  words  as  teaching  that  when  the  Apostles 
defended  themselves  before  kings,  governors,  rulers,  syna- 
gogues, their  words  would  be  their  own  words,  and  yet  the 
words  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  just  as  in  the  Old  Testament 
"  Moses  spake,"  and  yet  *'  God  spake."  In  the  address  of 
St.  Peter  in  the  fourth  chapter  of  Acts  of  course  this 
promise  was  fulfilled ;  and  it  is  said,  "  then  Peter,  filled 
with  the  Holy  Ghost,  said  unto  them;"  and  yet  the  speech 
is  Peter's  in  thought,  order,  language,  throughout. 

Here,  perhaps,  the  testimony  of  the  Lord  Jesus  to  the 
inspiration  of  the  then  unwritten  volume  ceases.  His 
Apostles  must  teach.  The  Holy  Spirit  would  teach  them 
all  things — bring  all  things  to  their  remembrance ;  and  He 
promises  that  on  special  occasions,  surely  terrifying  in 
advance  to  these  unlearned  and  ignorant  men,  when  they 
would  appear  before  rulers  and  kings.  He  gives  them  the 
reassuring  promise  that  on  these  dread  occasions  it  would 
be  given  them  by  the  Holy  Spirit  what  they  should  speak. 
May  we  not  add  to  the  testimony  the  following  inferences? 
May  we  not  regard  the  promise  for  this  special  occasion 
only  the  disclosure  of  what  was  true  on  all  occasions  ?  If 
plenary  inspiration  would  be  given  them  for  the  spoken 
word,  would  it  not  be  given  for  the  written  and  abiding 
word  ?  If  given  to  their  speeches  before  these  little  as- 
sembUes,  "would  they  be  left  to  all  the  hazard  of  human 
fallibility  when   instructing   by  letter   their   converts   in 


16 

Corinth  or  Colosse,  when  writing  to  the  twelve  tribes 
which  are  scattered  abroad,  or  to  the  strangers  scattered 
throughout  Pontus  and  Bjthynia  ?  " 

2.  I  have  adduced  first  the  testimony  of  our  Blessed 
Lord,  parting  it  from  the  testimony  given  elsewhere  in  the 
New  Testament.  This  has  been  done  in  deference  to  the 
opinion  which  gives  His  words  the  supremacy  over  those 
of  His  Apostles,  It  may  be  that  there  are  some  who  do 
not  give  due  reverence  to  the  servants  who  yet  "  will  rev- 
erence the  Son."  To  His  testimony  there  will  be  now 
added  the  testimony  of  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament. 

In  the  first  place  here,  too,  are  testimonies  that  the  Old 
Testament  is  both  the  word  of  man  and  the  Word  of  God. 
St.  Paul  applied  to  the  Jews  at  Rome  the  language  of 
prophesy:  "Well  spake  the  Eoty  Ghost  by  Esaias  the 
Prophet;"  while  St.  John,  quoting  the  same  passage, 
affirms  "  these  things  said  Esaias^  Again,  the  Divine- 
human  origin  is  brought  out  in  St.  Matthew's  words, 
"  spoken  by  the  Lord  through  the  prophet."  Again,  the 
general  truth  is  affirmed,  of  which  these  are  special  illus- 
trations: "Holy  men  spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the 
Holy  Ghost."     Men  spake,  yet  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost. 

In  the  second  place.  Apostles  and  Evangelists  follow  the 
Master's  example  in  repeatedly  calling  the  Old  Testament 
•'  the  Scripture  " — "  the  Word  of  God  " ;  and  one  of  them 
declares  of  the  Word  of  God  that  it  is  "  living  and  active, 
and  sharper  than  any  two-edged  sword." 

In  the  third  place,  in  this  same  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
a  passage  in  each  of  the  three  divisions  of  the  Old  Testament 
is  ascribed  to  the  Holy  Ghost:  "The  Holy  Ghost  this 
signifying,"  in  a  passage  from  the  Law;  *'The  Holy 
Ghost  also  is  a  witness  to  us,"  in  a  passage  from  the 
Prophets;  "Wherefore,  as  the  Holy  Ghost  saith,"  in  the 
words  of  the  Psalmist. 

In  the  fourth  place,  when  St.  Paul  declares  "  all  Scrip- 
ture is  given  by  inspiration  of  God,"  no  interpretation,  in 


17 

view  of  all  the  circumstances,  seems  to  be  allowable  which 
does  not  make  "  Scripture  "  coextensive,  at  least,  with  the 
Old  Testament,  and  "  given  by  inspiration  of  God  "  co- 
extensive with  Scripture.  When  St.  Peter  adds,  "  Holy 
men  spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost,"  he 
declares  through  whom  the  inspired  Scripture  came  — 
through  men  ;  from  whom  it  came — from  the  Holy  Ghost ; 
how  it  came — because  men  were  moved,  borne  along  by 
the  Holy  Ghost. 

In  the  fifth  place,  as  to  the  inspiration  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament, St.  Peter  in  one  passage  speaks  of  certain  of  St. 
Paul's  Epistles  as  ''Scripture."  Does  he  not  by  this  act 
lift  them  to  the  same  position  of  dignity  and  inspiration 
as  "the  other  Scriptures?  "  If  this  is  atiirmed  of  some  of 
the  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  why  is  it  not  true  of  the  remainder 
of  the  volume  ? 

In  the  sixth  place,  hear  St.  Paul  affirm  his  plenary 
inspiration  when  speaking  to  the  churches :  "Which  things, 
also,  we  speak,  not  in  the  z<;o?'(?s  which  man's  wisdom  teach- 
eth,  but  which  the  Holy  Ghost  teaches."  Does  he  not 
seem  to  be  filling  up  and  expounding  the  promise  of  Christ, 
*'  The  Holy  Ghost  shall  teach  you  ?  "  To  what  extent?  in 
what  degree  ?  we  ask.  St.  Paul  answers :  "  We  speak  in  the 
woi^ds  which  the  Holy  Ghost  teacheth."  Again  :  "For  this 
cause,  also,  thank  we  God  without  ceasing" — mark  his 
fervent  thankfulness — "  because  when  ye  received  the  Word 
of  God,  which  ye  heard  of  us,  ye  received  it  not  as  the 
word  of  men,  but  as  it  is  in  truth,  the  word  of  God,  which 
worketh  effectually  also  in  you."  Are  we  to  suppose  that 
when  at  Thessalonica  he  spoke  the  Word  of  God,  but  now 
writing  to  Thessalonica  he  would  have  them  suppose  he  was 
writing  only  the  word  of  man  ? 

III.  We  have  listened  to  the  Scripture  ;  let  us  now  listen 
to  the  Church  interpreting  the  Scripture,  for  which  she  is 
"  witness  and  keeper."      In  doing  this,  we  but  obey  an 


18 

English  canon  of  1571,  often  imperfectly  quoted:  "They 
shall  not  teach  anything  from  the  pulpit  to  be  religiously 
held  and  believed  by  the  people  but  what  is  agreeable  to 
the  doctrine  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament  and  collected  out 
of  that  very  doctrine  by  the  Catholic  fathers  and  ancient 
bishops,  and  since  the  articles  of  religion  are  beyond  doubt 
collected  out  of  the  Sacred  Books  of  the  Old  and  New  Tes- 
ments  and  agree  in  all  things  with  the  heavenly  doctrine 
contained  in  them,"  &c. 

Now,  having  urged  that  plenary  inspiration  is  "  agree- 
able to  the  doctrine  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,"  the 
next  step  is  to  show  very  briefly  that  plenary  inspiration  is 
"  collected  out  of  that  very  doctrine  by  the  Catholic  fathers 
and  ancient  bishops."  "■  Their  ordinary  style  in  quoting 
the  Scriptures,"  says  Lee,  "  was  either  to  omit  the  writer's 
name,  and  say,  '  Thus  spake  the  Holy  Ghost,"  or  to  supply 
the  writer's  name,  thus,  '  So  spake  the  Spirit  by  Solomon,' 
by 'Isaiah,'  by 'Paul;'  hence  the  numerous  epithets  ap- 
plied to  every  part  of  Scripture — the  'Scriptures  of  the 
Lord,' '  the  Divine  Scriptures,' '  Heavenly  Letters,'  '  Scrip- 
ture given  by  inspiration  of  God.'  '  Give  diligent  heed/ 
says  St.  Clement  of  Rome,  *  to  the  true  sayings  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.'  " 

The  doctrine  of  inspiration  was  not  defined,  except  in- 
cidentally, by  Councils,  because,  with  few  exceptions,  but 
one  doctrine  prevailed ;  but  the  words  of  the  Nicene  creed — 
"  who  spake  by  the  prophets  " — when  we  remember  how 
comprehensive  was  then  the  term  "  prophet,"  and  how 
high  was  then  the  doctrine  of  the  Spirit's  influence,  may 
be  regarded  as  an  incidental  assertion  of  plenary  inspira- 
tion. "  The  Christian  Fathers,"  declares  Canon  West- 
cott,  "  with  one  consent  affirmed  in  the  most  complete 
manner  the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures,  placing  the 
writings  of  the  New  Testament  on  the  same  footing  with 
those  of  the  Old,  as  soon  as  it  was  possible  that  the  Apos- 
tolic Records  could  rise  with  clear  pre-eminence  above  the 
oral  tradition  of  the  Apostolic  teachings." 


19 

Lee,  iu  his  work  on  inspiration,  "  ventures  to  think  that 
an  exact  agreement  exists  between  the  doctrine  of  inspira- 
tion maintained  in  the  present  work  and  that  which  has 
been  inculcated  by  the  Church  Catholic  from  the  earliest 
times,"  and  "during  the  first  fifteen  centuries  of  the 
Church."  "  The  doctrine  maintained  in  the  present  work" 
is  "the  Divine  authority,  the  infallible  certainty,  and  the 
entire  truthfulness  of  every  part  of  the  Scriptures."  "  The 
words  of  Scripture  are  no  less  Divine  than  the  doctrines 
which  they  convey." 

"A  great  and  noble  doctrine,"  Canon  Westcott  calls 
"  this  combination  of  the  outward  and  the  inward,  God 
and  man — the  moving  power  and  the  living  instrument." 
Mark !  he  says  "  doctrine,"  not  theory — a  doctrine  taught 
by  Scripture,  and  the  Church  interpreting  Scripture. 
"  It  presupposes,"  he  adds,  "  that  the  same  providential 
Power  which  gave  the  message,  selected  the  messenger, 
and  implies  that  the  traits  of  individual  character  and  the 
peculiarities  of  manner  and  purpose  which  are  displayed 
in  the  composition  and  language  of  the  sacred  writings, 
are  essential  to  the  perfect  exhibition  of  their  meaning.  It 
combines  harmoniously  the  two  terms  in  that  relation  of 
the  finite  to  the  Infinite  which  is  involved  in  the  very 
idea  of  revelation.  It  preserves  absolute  truth  with  per- 
fect humanity,  so  that  the  nature  of  man  is  not  neutralized 
if  we  may  thus  speak  by  the  Divine  agency ;  and  the  truth 
of  God  is  not  impaired,  but  exactly  expressed  in  one  of 
its  several  aspects  by  the  individual  mind.  The  letter 
becomes  as  perfect  as  the  spirit;  and  it  may  well  seem 
that  the  image  of  the  incarnation  is  reflected  in  the 
Christian  Scriptures,  which,  as  I  believe,  exhibit  the  human 
and  Divine  in  the  highest  form  and  in  the  most  perfect 
union." 

IV.  Of  course  objections  are  urged  against  this  doctrine  of 
plenary  inspiration — objections  which  there  is  no  space  to 
meet  in    detail.     Some   object   that   the   impress  of  each 


20 

writer's  personality  upou  his  style  is  incompatible  with  the 
constraining  and  controlling  movement  of  the  Spirit — for- 
getful that  the  same  difficulty  emerges  in  philosophy  and 
religion  ;  forgetful  that  in  passages,  confessedly  the  utter- 
ance of  God,  introduced  with  the  words  "  thus  saith  the 
Lord,"  the  passage  in  Isaiah  bears  the  impress  of  Isaiah, 
and  in  Jeremiah,  the  impress  of  Jeremiah.  Some  object 
to  the  contents  of  the  Book,  and,  for  instance,  have  been 
asking  from  the  fourth  century  until  now,  whether  inspira- 
tion guided  the  Apostle  to  send  for  "  the  cloak  he  left  at 
Troas";  forgetful  that  the  passage  has  comforted  other 
aged  and  imperfectly-clad  prisoners ;  forgetful  that,  as 
Bishop  Butler  says,  "  it  is  evidently  supposable  beforehand 
that  we  should  fall  into  infinite  follies  and  mistakes  in  pre- 
tending to  judge  otherwise  than  from  experience  and 
analogy  concerning  revelation."  Others  allege  apparent 
discrepancies  in  the  Bible— with  itself,  with  history,  and 
science ;  forgetful  that,  as  the  Bible,  with  a  noble  self- 
conHdence,  commits  itself  to  some  main  outlines  and  many 
details  of  the  history  and  life  of  all  the  great  and  some  of 
the  petty  nations  of  antiquity,  the  marvel  is  that  the  ap- 
parent discrepancies  are  so  few ;  forgetful  that  this  marvel 
finds  its  rational  solution  only  in  accepting  plenary  inspira- 
tion; that  as  knowledge  advances,  the  discrepancies  di- 
minish; thus  suggesting  that  those  which  remain  are  due 
not  to  lack  of  truth  in  the  Bible,  but  to  lack  of  knowledge 
in  ourselves. 

Again,  as  to  objections  arising  from  internal  improbabil- 
ities, we  must  remember  the  dicta  of  Bishop  Butler:  first, 
"■  real  internal  improbabilities,  which  rise  even  to  moral  cer- 
tainty, are  overcome  by  the  most  ordinary  testimony ;  and, 
secondly,  we  scarce  know  what  are  improbabilities  as  to  the 
matter  we  are  here  considering,"  viz.,  revelation. 

In  the  next  place,  objections  of  a  most  serious  character 
environ  the  theory  of  partial  inspiration — the  inspiration 
of  the  substance  of  doctrine  and  not  of  language. 

Though  needing  testimony  in  its  behalf  as  a  supernatural 


21 

fact,  it  is  absolutely  without  testimony  from  the  Word  of 
God,  without  testimony  from  the  Church  of  God,  except 
from  comparatively  few  and  chiefly  recent  writers. 

Again,  affirming  without  proof  an  intermittent  action  of 
the  Spirit,  and  giving  us  no  guide  except  tlie  light  of  the 
Christian  consciousness  to  discover  when  the  infallible 
Spirit  speaks  and  when  only  fallible  man,  it  may  be  said  to 
have  obviated  apparent  objections  against  the  Book  by  a 
real  destruction  of  its  authoritative  value. 

Again,  affirming  a  supernatural  conveyance  of  spiritual 
truth  through  the  writers,  it  is  open  to  the  same  objection 
which  it  alleges  against  plenary  inspiration — the  difficulty 
of  reconciling  Divine  control  and  human  freedom. 

And  it  will  be  found  that  the  great  mass  of  the  objections 
made  to  the  Divine-human  Book  are  just  such  as  were 
vainly  made  against  the  Divine-human  Person  of  our  Lord. 
The  best  solvent  of  the  difficulties  will  be  found  in  the 
decisions  of  the  first  four  General  Councils.  The  best 
illustration  of  the  Book  with  its  two-fold  nature  will  be 
found  in  the  God-man.  Have  not  men  questioned,  now 
the  true  Divinity  of  the  Book,  and  now  the  perfectness  of 
its  human  character  ?  Have  they  not  endeavored,  now  to 
make  partition  of  the  Divine  and  human  elements,  and 
and  now  to  confound  them?  And  is  there  not  great 
light  shed  upon  the  supernatural  Book  by  this  lumi- 
nous statement  of  Hooker,  with  reference  to  the  super- 
natural Person  ? — "  There  are  but  four  things  which  concur 
to  make  complete  the  whole  state  of  ourLord  Jesus  Christ: 
His  Deity,  His  manhood^  the  conjunction  of  both,  and  the 
distinction  of  the  one  from  the  other,  being  joined  in  one. 
Four  principal  heresies  there  are  which  have  in  these 
things  withstood  the  truth :  Arians,  by  bending  themselves 
against  the  Deity  of  Christ ;  Apollinarians,  by  maiming 
and  misinterpreting  that  which  belongeth  to  His  human 
nature  ;  Nestorians,  by  rending  Christ  asunder  and  divid- 
ing Him  into  two  persons ;  the  followers  of  Eutyches,  by 
confounding  in  His  Person  those  natures  which  they  should 


22 

distinguish.  Against  these  there  have  been  four  most 
famous  General  Councils:  The  Council  of  Nice,  to  define 
against  Ariaus  ;  against  Apollinarians,  the  Council  of  Con- 
stantinople ;  the  Council  of  Ephesus,  against  Nestorians ; 
against  Eutychians,  the  Chalcedon  Council.  In  four  words — 
truly,  perfectly,  indivisibly,  distinctly — the  first  applied  to  His 
being  God,  and  the  second  to  His  being  man,  the  third  to 
His  being  of  both  One,  and  the  fourth  to  His  still  continu- 
ing in  that  one  Both — we  may  fully,  by  way  of  abridgment, 
comprise  whatsoever  antiquity  hath  at  large  handled, 
either  in  declaration  of  Christian  belief  or  in  refutation  of 
the  aforesaid  heresies.  Within  the  compass  of  which  four 
heads  I  may  truly  affirm  that  all  heresies  which  touch  but 
the  Person  of  Jesus  Christ,  whether  they  have  risen  in 
these  later  days  or  in  any  age  heretofore,  may  be  with 
great  facility  brought  to  confine  themselves." 

May  we  not  truly  affirm  that  all  the  errors  "  which 
touch  "  the  Divine-human  Book  "  are  here  set  forth  ?  " 
May  we  not  affirm  that  the  truth  as  to  the  Book  is  taught 
by  these  Councils?  It  is  truly  Divine,  perfectly  human; 
the  Divine  and  human  elements  are  indivisible  and  yet 
distinct.  It  may  be  as  impossible  to  trace  the  inter- 
lacing lines  of  the  Divine  and  human  in  the  Book  as  these 
Councils  found  it  to  adjust  the  boundaries  of  the  natures  in 
the  Person  of  our  Lord.  But  it  is  as  easy  in  the  one  case 
as  the  other  to  see  and  feel  and  declare  "  how  human  and 
yet  how  Divine."  The  God-man  had  His  Tabor  heights 
where  He  shone  in  glory  and  held  an  easy  sceptre  over 
winds  and  waves,  and  .life  and  death;  but  none  the  less 
did  He  sit  weary  by  the  well  of  Samaria ;  none  the  less 
was  He  rocked  to  sleep  by  the  billows  of  Gennesaret.  The 
Book  has  its  Tabor  heights  and  its  Holy  Temple,  wliere 
Deity  sits  enthroned  ;  and  the  temple  shakes  at  His  pres- 
ence, and  angels  cry,  Holy !  Holy !  Holy !  and  unholy 
man  cries  woe  is  me,  for  I  am  undone !  but  none  the  less 
it  has  "  household  vvords  "  for  the  families  of  men.  And 
as  the  Lord  Jesus  was  perfectly  human,  yet  without  sin, 
so  the  Book  is  perfectly  human,  yet  without  error. 


23 

Y.  I  shall  touch  on  only  a  few  of  the  arguments  for  the 
plenary  inspiration  of  the  Bible  from  internal  evidence 
arising  from  the  harmony  of  its  phenomena  with  the  doc- 
trine ;  and  touchiug  on  these  I  shall  close. 

If  the  men  spake  only  when  moved  and  as  moved  by  the 
Holy  Ghost,  we  have  explained  to  us  the  reticence,  "  the 
silences,  of  Scripture,"  hardly  less  wonderful  than  its  utter- 
ances. We  understand  why  the  unlearned  St.  John  selected 
from  among  the  many  things  which  Jesus  said  and  did  only 
those  which  he  wrote,  that  we  "  might  believe  that  Jesus  is 
the  Christ — the  Son  of  God,"  and  wrote  these  things  with 
an  elevation  of  style  and  a  perfection  of  plan  which  could 
never  be  learned  in  any  school.  If  they  spake  only  as 
moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  in  fulfillment  of  a  Divine  plan, 
then  we  can  understand  that  though  they  spake  "  at  sundry 
times,  in  divers  manners,"  in  divers  places,  parted  from  one 
another  by  centuries  and  almost  by  continents,  that  yet 
their  many  writings  speak  with  one  heart  and  one  soul. 
First  one,  then  another,  felt  the  prophetic  fire,  obeyed  the 
Heavenly  impulse,  wrote  of  things  in  Heaven  and  earth — 
past,  present,  or  to  come — recorded  at  times  under  Heavenly 
guidance  the  fruit  of  human  toil.  The  Omnipresent  Spirit 
moved,  now  on  Moses  in  the  wilderness,  now  on  Isaiah  by 
Siloa's  brook,  now  on  Ezekiel  by  Chebar's  stream,  and  now 
on  Israel's  sweet  Psalmist,  wandering  in  the  wilderness  or 
by  the  water-brooks,  and  as  He  moved  they  spake.  The 
Eternal  Spirit  moved  on  holy  men  between  whom  almost 
as  many  centuries  slowl}'  rolled  their  years  and  changes  as 
the  centuries  which  part  us  from  the  last  inspired  penman, 
and  still  all  along  the  colossal  time-scale,  as  He  moved  they 
spake.  There  is  something  unique  and  sublime  in  this 
two-fold  authorship  of  the  Book  of  the  Ages — the  Divine 
Author,  who  inspires  all  from  Genesis  to  Revelation  ;  the 
human  authors,  so  transitory.  The  Divine  Author  lives  on, 
the  human  authors  die  all  along  the  march  of  Revelation. 
The  Divine  Author  is  "  from  everlasting  to  everlasting ;  " 
Moses,  Isaiah,  St.  John  are  "  swept  away  as  with  a  flood." 
The  one  Divine  authorship  secures  for  the  Book  its  majestic, 


24 

sublime,  Divine  unity;  the  various  human  authorship  se- 
cures for  it  a  variety  as  great  as  the  generations  and  the 
homes  in  which  the  authors  lived,  the  stations  they  held, 
the  men  they  were.     It  gives  us — 

"  Job's  pathetic  plaint  and  wailing  cry, 
Or  rapt  Isaiah's  wild  seraphic  fire."" 

It  gives  us  history,  biography,  argument,  appeal ;    the  par- 
able and  the  proverb ;  the  sententious  wisdom  of  the  wisest 
of   monarchs,  and  the  tenderest  of  idyls — poetry,    epic, 
dramatic,  lyric,  elegiac.     And  yet  how  majestic  the  unity. 
It  speaks  through  many  men  of  many  climes  and  genera- 
tions, but  it  speaks  with  "  one  heart  and  one  soul."     We 
may  say  of  both  Testaments  what  St.  John  says  of  his 
Gospel :  "  These  things  are  written  that  ye  might  believe 
that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,   and  that  behev- 
ing,  ye  might  have  life  through  His  name."     The  iirst 
pages  of  the  Bible  promise  Him  ;  the  last  glorify  Him  ;  all 
along  they  point  to  Him.    Men  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost 
foretell  Him,  and  with  strained  eye  strive  to  pierce  the 
future — "searching  what  manner  of  time  the  Spirit  of  Christ 
which  was  in  them  did  signify."  One  cries,  "  I  have  waited 
for  thy  salvation,  0  Lord  !  "  and  still  waiting,  he  is  gath- 
ered to  his  fathers.     But  the  Spirit  still  lives  and  moves 
on  men.     And  another  speaks,  "  I  shall  see  Him,  but  not 
now;  I  shall  behold  Him,  but  not  nigh."     And  still  the 
Prophets  fall,  and  still  the  Spirit  lives,  and  "  the  testimony 
of  Jesus  is  the  spirit  of  prophecy,"  and  of  Prophets  looking 
into  the  future  with  strained  eye  and  outstretched  arms, 
until  the  Seed  of  the  Woman  came,  and  Simeon  took  Him 
up  in  his  arms,  and  blessed  God,  saying,  "  Mine  eyes  have 
seen  Thy  salvation."     And  salvation  through  Christ  is  still 
the  theme,  until,  in  the  closing  pages  of  the  Apocalypse, 
Christ  has  restored  the  lost  Paradise  and  banished  from 
it  sin  and  death,  and  amid  its  trees  and  rivers  built  the 
Holy  City,  the  Heavenly  Jerusalem ;  and  the  nations  of 
them  which  are  saved  shall  walk  in  the  light  of  it. 

For  our  journey  to  that  City,  let  Thy  Word,  O  God,  be 
a  lamp  unto  our  feet  and  a  light  unto  our  path. 


DATE  DUE                            1 

MjiV?*!!*^^^' 

gt^jr '    q  1 

1 

GAYLORD 

1 

PRINTEOINU.S.A. 

PAMPHLET  BINDER 

^^^   Syracuse,  N.  Y. 
HZZZ    Stockton,  Calif. 


BS480.E465*! 

The  plenary  inspiration  of  the  Holy 

Princeton  Theological  Semmary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  00051   8896 


tmM 

mm 


